7 ms·

Dude, this is the kind of stuff I could run in realtime on an Amiga. Maybe not at the same resolution, but the resolution isn't the bottleneck in this demo eith

by xigma 8y ago

Dude, this is the kind of stuff I could run in realtime on an Amiga. Maybe not at the same resolution, but the resolution isn't the bottleneck in this demo either, I'm struggling to hit 40Hz at any scale.

microcolonel 8y ago
On the Amiga, you didn't go the stupid way around and represent your object as a series of text path strings which need to be parsed into objects and then finally displayed for each frame. You can get your Amiga performance with canvas; and you can get way better with WebGL. This is just a case of wrong-tool-for-wrong-job.
- xigma 8y ago
  Do you realize that in Canvas colors are represented as a "series of text strings" that need to be parsed? Did you know that drawing paths requires a ton of pretty expensive Javascript calls or alternatively passing "a series of text strings"? Maybe the string way is actually faster, I haven't tested it because it isn't supported everywhere. Were you aware that vector rendering is not usually done on GPUs, mainly because of the high overhead of state changes when using a graphics API, especially one like WebGL? I guess you could do all your rendering in software in Javascript (which for these purposes is nowhere close to what you can get with C/C++) to a byte buffer and then do the final transfer to Canvas. Even in that case, you might be surprised how much overhead that final transfer has...
  - the8472 8y ago
    2D Canvas can be populated with byte buffers
  - jancsika 8y ago
    > Were you aware that vector rendering is not usually done on GPUs, mainly because of the high overhead of state changes when using a graphics API, especially one like WebGL? But it's actually worse than that, isn't it? It's not only that I can't render a complex SVG path on the GPU, but I can't even apply a GPU accelerated transform on existing child nodes of an SVG. Why is it that <div> can get a GPU-accelerated transform but <g> can't?
    - microcolonel 8y ago
      > Why is it that <div> can get a GPU-accelerated transform but <g> can't? Something that could either be called laziness or difficulty, depending on your perspective.

by xigma 8y ago

microcolonel 8y ago

On the Amiga, you didn't go the stupid way around and represent your object as a series of text path strings which need to be parsed into objects and then finally displayed for each frame. You can get your Amiga performance with canvas; and you can get way better with WebGL. This is just a case of wrong-tool-for-wrong-job.

xigma 8y ago
Do you realize that in Canvas colors are represented as a "series of text strings" that need to be parsed? Did you know that drawing paths requires a ton of pretty expensive Javascript calls or alternatively passing "a series of text strings"? Maybe the string way is actually faster, I haven't tested it because it isn't supported everywhere. Were you aware that vector rendering is not usually done on GPUs, mainly because of the high overhead of state changes when using a graphics API, especially one like WebGL? I guess you could do all your rendering in software in Javascript (which for these purposes is nowhere close to what you can get with C/C++) to a byte buffer and then do the final transfer to Canvas. Even in that case, you might be surprised how much overhead that final transfer has...
- the8472 8y ago
  2D Canvas can be populated with byte buffers
- jancsika 8y ago
  > Were you aware that vector rendering is not usually done on GPUs, mainly because of the high overhead of state changes when using a graphics API, especially one like WebGL? But it's actually worse than that, isn't it? It's not only that I can't render a complex SVG path on the GPU, but I can't even apply a GPU accelerated transform on existing child nodes of an SVG. Why is it that <div> can get a GPU-accelerated transform but <g> can't?
  - microcolonel 8y ago
    > Why is it that <div> can get a GPU-accelerated transform but <g> can't? Something that could either be called laziness or difficulty, depending on your perspective.